Ban On Feeding The Homeless Not Working
Sometimes it's hard to believe that in the land of the free that people would actually be committing a crime for giving food to a hungry person in need. But in many jurisdictions, that is the case.
One community group that has come under fire for it, refers to themselves as, Food Not Bombs, and they have been going around and feeding homeless people throughout Florida, despite not having the proper permits to do so.
A number of the volunteers have already been arrested for feeding the homeless, a move which understandably sparked outrage with the public. This isn't the first time either that someone has been arrested in the US for feeding the homeless, a 90 year old man made headlines a few years back when he too was arrested for feeding the homeless.
It's clear that the public overwhelmingly doesn't appear to agree with these restrictions.
Well, the City Council in Tampa, Florida, also now wants things to change and they say that they are now looking to endorse a much more hands-off approach when trying to regulate such efforts. Just recently, the council voted to consider an ordinance that would permit groups to distribute food without having to get any permit or liability insurance; so long as the event is under 50 people.
Having to ask permission first in order to peacefully congregate and exercise your natural rights, no matter the size of the group, is still outrageous. But at least they too see the cruelty in their use of violence against people who are just trying to help other human beings in need. The state, if anything, should be thanking these people for their service to others, not arresting them.
After members of the group Food Not Bombs were arrested for feeding others, even the prosecutor dropped the charges; saying it would be a waste of resources to prosecute people for doing charitable work and that it wouldn't promote justice or fairness. And he's right.
pics:
pixabay
Source:
http://www.fox13news.com/news/local-news/238010660-story
http://www.tbo.com/news/tampa-city-council-wants-to-make-food-not-bombs-feedings-legal-20170224/
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/justice/florida-feeding-homeless-charges/
"Another one of life's great pleasures ruined by a meddling bureaucracy." - David Letterman
Next time someone asks me "but who will build the roads?", I'll have to retort, "who will enforce the starvation of the less fortunate?" Government is the opposite of valuable.
This is bureaucracy gone wild, hard to believe that there could ever be such crazy laws.
Hi @doitvoluntarily, it is hard to believe that there can be a law against doing good to other people, who are not as fortunate as ourselves. This does not make sense!! (Or do you have a good system where the government can take care of all homeless people?) Here is South Africa these people will not survive without some food given to them by normal people passing by.
What reasons did they come up with to forbid feeding the poor?
safety, as always lol
Sigh
Did they outlaw having too many friends over for dinner too often as well?
i'm surprised they haven't taxed that yet
statism
So much for a government supposedly based on biblical principles. :(
😄😇😄
The American government was founded on liberal, deist principles, not necessarily Biblical ones. Many of the signers and framers of the founding documents were Deists, and many of our presidents were Deists (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln etc.)
It has since been corrupted by authoritarian government intervention, which flies wholly in the face of the liberal ideology. (When I speak of liberals, I do not mean it as the word has come to mean today. I speak of the liberals in times past. Men like John Locke, Voltaire, JFK, Martin Luther King Jr. etc.)
Hey, Max, I appreciate your comments here.
Yes, I understand the original meaning of the word "liberal," and also your need to anchor your use of it in history. ;) I think that at least with respect to what is being discussed here, we are "on the same page."
Having just now found and read your blog (what there is of it so far), I am less sure about other things. However, I appreciate much of what I see, and I have (belatedly) voted for one of your articles, and have followed you. I look forward to future interaction!
BTW, if you click on my fancy little GIF above, you'll find my Topical Table of Contents. I suspect you'll find a lot there of interest. ;) Welcome to Steemit! :)
Thanks so much! Im glad you've followed me! I'll be sure to follow you back :)
I saw your other response as well, and while Im very busy right now I will respond as soon as possible. Also, expect a new post soon! (Final edition to my series).
Thanks :)
Nice to "meet" you @maxvespia9! :)
Liberal, debit principles? Yes, of course. The founders were, however, far more well versed in the content of scripture than most moderns. Many core concepts of the idea of America were biblical (e.g. the concept of "public servant" vs "ruler.") However, at key junctures, biblical alignment was abandoned - possibly quite intentionally.
Jefferson, for instance, took a pair of scissors to his bible... And, the authors of the constitution might just as well have.
Nice to meet you as well @creatr! ;)
I agree they were well versed in scripture(as were most people at the time), but many abandoned it in their personal lives. I dont see many Biblical values in the constitution or the declaration of independence (although I may be missing them.)
Where in the Bible does it talk about a ruler serving his people/public servant?
Pretty much a principle throughout, but here, for example, is a "clear statement" by Jesus:
But what about the absolute command in the Bible to obey our authorities regardless of how they treat their citizens? As well as the bold claim that God places all our leaders into their positions? That would make God directly responsible for Stalin, Hitler, and many other totalitarian collectivist societies... He obviously either doesnt care enough to pick good leaders, with good "servant-hearted" values that he so allegedly supports, or he is cruel. Or, a classic Deist position, he doesnt interfere at all. (I am a Deist by the way.)
Chapter and verse, please?
There is no such "absolute command." However, a corrupted and co-opted "church" (organized religion) has gone to great lengths, hand in glove with the state, to make it appear so.
Such a claim, stated in this way, ignores a distinction between God's moral will and his sovereign will. Are you familiar with said distinction?
Now you are raising a classic false dichotomy.
Now you've expanded it to a false dilemma. There are, of course, other options, among which is what I accept as the actual solution, one fairly clearly elucidated in the bible.
By the way, I am not a deist. I believe that the man commonly known as "Jesus" is in all truth the eternally existent God who created the universe.
Romans 13: 1 and 2
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
I am not. What do you mean by that? Don't we all have a single will?
Your right, I apologize, perhaps you should explain you concept of God's will to me. The way I see it, in the Bible says he hand picks each of our leaders. Now, perhaps they're other options, but the ones that seem visibly apparent to me is:
God places all leaders in power (including evil ones)
From this , we could make one of these few conclusions about His character:
a. He is a cruel God to let cruel leaders come to power
b. He is a careless God who does not care who comes to power
c. He uses them as a "judgement" upon people.
If there are any other conclusions we can make, I would be grateful if you made them known to me. Now, my main objection to c. is that the Bible at the same time claims God is a loving God. Is it loving to judge and allow the carnage and mass genocide of millions of people at the hands of your hand-picked ruler? Regardless of this fact, answer "c" would still make God a cruel God, since he "judges" masses of innocent people, many of them adherents to His religion.
That's my main disagreement with the Christian religion, perhaps Ill do a post on it. If God is really an intervening and ever-present God, he is a cruel master.
Anyways, sorry for the long post :)
Thanks for continuing to discuss this affair with me. I enjoy it! :)
Hi, Max,
Ah, thanks for this clarification, and the subsequent story. I think I have a much better understanding now of your issue. However, this late on Sunday evening I'm not quite ready to respond - other than this acknowledgement and my appreciation.
I will get back to you on this topic, God willing. ;)
looks more like an organization of evil to me...given that it is founded upon force/extortion/coercion and not voluntary association.
I couldn't agree more... Fundamentally evil! :(
@doingitvoluntarily - that law is totally absurd
it doesn't make any sense wtf
WTF????? Don't feed the homeless...it takes away from feeding the illegal aliens!!! This country has gone absolutely insane! I'll be so glad when I die and don't have to be a part of this shithole anymore!!!!!
Hey yeah.It's is against the law here in Fort Myers Fl. also.
I bought 50 bags of trial size products and wanted to distribute to them downtown,and a deputy told me I can't.
He said I can drop them off at the shelter.
What people like him do not realize is that the people that volunteer at the shelter help themselves to whatever comes in for the homeless.
Same thing with the animal rescue places.
I personally know someone who worked at one, and every night she came home with large bags of dog and cat food,collars,leashes,toys etc...
It is disgusting.
I will not bring anything anywhere unless I can see the person I can hand it to, or see that a certain animal is being fed the food or given the collar.
I am so tired of the non profits stealing shit that is intended for others.